Where Complexity Belongs

[doctorbadwolf]

This applies to dnd homebrewing as well.

So i have recently been working hard to simplify my game, Crossroads, and one thing that is very important to that process is deciding where the game should be complex.

For instance, PCs are fairly complex, but the general rules are quite simple.

But there are less general rules that i think might need to be complex, and i am curious what folks think of my reasoning.

Ritual Magic - To me, this is an area where super simple rules completely waste the potential fun of ritual magic. I want to have to combine components and build the ritual mechanically. Something like 3-6 steps, more for BIG MAGIC. I want ritual casting to be a scene or a major component of a scene, not just a quick button you push.

crafting - Similar to ritual magic, but to me crafting should require checks, and be almost like a puzzle to solve, at least when you are creating something of your own invention or modifying something.

Do you agree? If not, why?

 

[RenleyRenfield]

Ohh this is near and dear to my heart!

I heard someone describe two similar games, same core system, yet why one came across as "complex" and one came across as "overwhelmingly complex"

I think at this point in my RPG book, that the core rules need to be 'competent', and no more. They need to do what it takes to make the core gameplay feel right and make anything built on top re-use that same clear mechanic. So they may be simple, but if they are too simple, then every darn thing in the game needs a sub-system = too complex! If the core rules are bonkers complex, then the game will prevent a lot of players from every really engaging in it = too complex!

Everything else needs to be not-needed and not chosen by the play at character creation.
- Then sub-systems like rituals, crafting, summoning, etc = can "be there where the player is ready". Give the player time to get used to the game before we dump 20 spells + 10 combat maneuvers + 10 different gear configs, etc etc , on them....

Players don't need to spend 3 hours perusing the rules for Crafting when it will be a dozen game sessions or more before Crafting is relevant. And if they DO need it game one, and it comes up often, then its better to be a simple rule and short. (again, if the core mechanic is competent, then its easier to make an 'advanced crafting' they can dig into later.)

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Ohh this is near and dear to my heart!

I heard someone describe two similar games, same core system, yet why one came across as "complex" and one came across as "overwhelmingly complex"

I think at this point in my RPG book, that the core rules need to be 'competent', and no more. They need to do what it takes to make the core gameplay feel right and make anything built on top re-use that same clear mechanic. So they may be simple, but if they are too simple, then every darn thing in the game needs a sub-system = too complex! If the core rules are bonkers complex, then the game will prevent a lot of players from every really engaging in it = too complex!

Everything else needs to be not-needed and not chosen by the play at character creation.
- Then sub-systems like rituals, crafting, summoning, etc = can "be there where the player is ready". Give the player time to get used to the game before we dump 20 spells + 10 combat maneuvers + 10 different gear configs, etc etc , on them....

Players don't need to spend 3 hours perusing the rules for Crafting when it will be a dozen game sessions or more before Crafting is relevant. And if they DO need it game one, and it comes up often, then its better to be a simple rule and short. (again, if the core mechanic is competent, then its easier to make an 'advanced crafting' they can dig into later.)

Yes! I was just thinking that my take on it can be expressed as

The more you use the rule, the more important it is for it to be simple. The less often it is used, the more it should stand out from normal gameplay with a little more complexity.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

@RenleyRenfield

Also, I really like the point you made about how soon after chargen a rule will matter.

I recognize that my system has a lot of character creation complexity, so it is even more vital that the stuff you will use right after session 0 be quite simple. If there are 13 steps to making a character, session 1 gameplay should be simple enough to fit on a single page in condensed language.

 

[Tigris]

For me crafting pretty much always just sounds like a waste of space in the rulebook. Gloomhaven RPG for me is the worst offender I have recently saw.


I have not seen a single game where I found crafting really interesting, and it brings a lot of complexity to the items part, which often already has a lot of complexity (if you have interesting items).


Your description of rituals for me sounds the same as crafting, which makes me not like it. If rituals are the core of the game, its different, but already in D&D 4E the rituals were too complicated for many people and they only required "being able to use rituals, buy the ritual, have components (can easily be bought) to use ritual".



For me the complexity of a game needs to be in the core parts, so characters makes sense. Rituals and crafting only makes sense to be complex it that is the core part of the game.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

@RenleyRenfield

Also, I really like the point you made about how soon after chargen a rule will matter.

I recognize that my system has a lot of character creation complexity, so it is even more vital that the stuff you will use right after session 0 be quite simple. If there are 13 steps to making a character, session 1 gameplay should be simple enough to fit on a single page in condensed language.

Indeed! One thing we found with my RPG was that it has a LOT of spells the players can choose from and even possibly use starting game 1. And while a big 'catalogue' of spells is fun, it can make character creation a daunting task. (I think Exalted 3e suffers from this to be honest).

So one thing I did was limit down the starting spells to only a few in your 'core competency', just the one. Gives you like 5~10 to pick from.

But thennnn..... when the player is ready to go look for new spells, it says in the main spell section "you can have any spell for any of your core competencies, so long as you meet the level requirement."

So this helps a couple things. it helps new player jump in and get going. and it helps old-hat players start with all they really want since they know the full set by now. And either way, it leaves spells ready to "grab off the shelf" when you are ready to read through the big 'ol list

And any true and real 'sub systems' (rituals and crafting are good examples) are left to level 3+ kinda thing, that way players and GMs dont have to worry about them till the core rules are second hat to them.

let's not forget about GMs too! They have sooo much complexity to juggle, NPCs and PCs and subsystems, if not quick to use, can get ignored easily!

 

[GMMichael]

The rules to Monopoly are not that long, but players still ignore some rules.

It's more of an issue of "what are the players willing to use" than "which parts should be complex."

 

[Staffan]

I have not seen a single game where I found crafting really interesting, and it brings a lot of complexity to the items part, which often already has a lot of complexity (if you have interesting items).

I think a lot of people enjoy crafting aspects of various video games and try to translate those things into RPGs. But they work very differently on a fundamental level. Primarily, video game crafting is often about finding crafting materials. In many cases, this is something done semi-passively as you are out doing other adventuring – you're running from Crossroads to one of the oases in the Barrens in order to kill some centaurs and examine the weird magic going on, and hey look at that, some Mageroyal up on that hill, I'll go pick that up. But in an RPG, what would happen is that you'd leave Crossroads, and then the GM says "at about noon the next day, you approach the oasis." Travel time is usually abstracted away, which means there's little opportunity for gathering resources along the way. Or if there is, it's going to be a matter of some random rolls, which isn't as satisfying.

One way of solving this is to make components an optional bonus to crafting things. I am thinking of something like Ars Magica, where there was a big list of modifiers to item creation based both on materials and on the form the item would take – a wand would be better for projectiles, while a staff would be better for controlling things. Incorporating a ruby would give a big bonus to fire magic. Things like that.

That said, another thing I think is important for optional complexity in a game is that the affected sub-systems are primarily ones not done in stressful situations. You might have a time limit for your ritual magic, but it's usually more along the lines of "We need to do this before the army gets here" or maybe in extreme cases "before the goons break down the door", but it's usually not "before the wolf tears my throat out." You want the player to be able to discuss things back and forth with the GM without breaking the pacing of an action scene.